Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2016 Jun 28;115(1):90-4.
doi: 10.1038/bjc.2016.162. Epub 2016 Jun 2.

Contemporary accuracy of death certificates for coding prostate cancer as a cause of death: Is reliance on death certification good enough? A comparison with blinded review by an independent cause of death evaluation committee

Emma L Turner  1 , Chris Metcalfe  1 , Jenny L Donovan  1 , Sian Noble  1 , Jonathan A C Sterne  1 , J Athene Lane  1 , Eleanor I Walsh  1 , Elizabeth M Hill  1 , Liz Down  1 , Yoav Ben-Shlomo  1 , Steven E Oliver  2 , Simon Evans  3 , Peter Brindle  4 , Naomi J Williams  5 , Laura J Hughes  6 , Charlotte F Davies  1 , Siaw Yein Ng  7 , David E Neal  8 , Freddie C Hamdy  8 , Peter Albertsen  9 , Colette M Reid  10 , Jon Oxley  11 , John McFarlane  3 , Mary C Robinson  12 , Jan Adolfsson  13 , Anthony Zietman  14 , Michael Baum  15 , Anthony Koupparis  16 , Richard M Martin  1   17
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Contemporary accuracy of death certificates for coding prostate cancer as a cause of death: Is reliance on death certification good enough? A comparison with blinded review by an independent cause of death evaluation committee

Emma L Turner et al. Br J Cancer. .

Abstract

Background: Accurate cause of death assignment is crucial for prostate cancer epidemiology and trials reporting prostate cancer-specific mortality outcomes.

Methods: We compared death certificate information with independent cause of death evaluation by an expert committee within a prostate cancer trial (2002-2015).

Results: Of 1236 deaths assessed, expert committee evaluation attributed 523 (42%) to prostate cancer, agreeing with death certificate cause of death in 1134 cases (92%, 95% CI: 90%, 93%). The sensitivity of death certificates in identifying prostate cancer deaths as classified by the committee was 91% (95% CI: 89%, 94%); specificity was 92% (95% CI: 90%, 94%). Sensitivity and specificity were lower where death occurred within 1 year of diagnosis, and where there was another primary cancer diagnosis.

Conclusions: UK death certificates accurately identify cause of death in men with prostate cancer, supporting their use in routine statistics. Possible differential misattribution by trial arm supports independent evaluation in randomised trials.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Process for evaluating cause of death.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Albertsen PC, Walters S, Hanley JA (2000) A comparison of cause of death determination in men previously diagnosed with prostate cancer who died in 1985 or 1995. J Urol 163: 519–523. - PubMed
    1. Barry MJ, Andriole GL, Culkin DJ, Fox SH, Jones KM, Carlyle MH, Wilt TJ (2013) Ascertaining cause of death among men in the prostate cancer intervention versus observation trial. Clin Trials 10: 907–914. - PubMed
    1. Black WC, Haggstrom DA, Welch HG (2002) All-cause mortality in randomized trials of cancer screening. J Natl Cancer Inst 94: 167–173. - PubMed
    1. Clopper CJ, Pearson ES (1934) The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 26: 404–413.
    1. de Koning HJ, Blom J, Merkelbach JW, Raaijmakers R, Verhaegen H, Van VP, Nelen V, Coebergh JW, Hermans A, Ciatto S, Makinen T (2003) Determining the cause of death in randomized screening trial(s) for prostate cancer. BJU Int 92(Suppl 2): 71–78. - PubMed

Publication types